59862 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Office of Energy Policy and New Uses 

7 CFR Part 2902 

RIN 0503–AA32 

Designation of Biobased Items for 

Federal Procurement 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Policy and 

New Uses, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) is proposing to 

amend the guidelines for designating 

biobased products for Federal 

procurement, to add 10 sections to 

designate the following 10 items within 

which biobased products would be 

afforded Federal procurement 

preference, as provided for under 

section 9002 of the Farm Security and 

Rural Investment Act of 2002: Bath and 

tile cleaners; clothing products; concrete 

and asphalt release fluids; cutting, 

drilling, and tapping oils; de-icers; 

durable films; firearm lubricants; floor 

strippers; laundry products; and wood 

and concrete sealers. USDA also is 

proposing minimum biobased content 

for each of these items. Once USDA 

designates an item, procuring agencies 

are required generally to purchase 

biobased products within these 

designated items where the purchase 

price of the procurement item exceeds 

$10,000 or where the quantity of such 

items or the functionally equivalent 

items purchased over the preceding 

fiscal year equaled $10,000 or more. 

DATES: USDA will accept public 

comments on this proposed rule until 

December 11, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods. All 

submissions received must include the 

agency name and Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN). The RIN for 

this rulemaking is 0503–AA32. Also, 

please identify submittals as pertaining 

to the ‘‘Proposed Designation of Items.’’ 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: fb4p@oce.usda.gov. Include 

RIN number 0503–AA32 and ‘‘Proposed 

Designation of Items’’ on the subject 

line. Please include your name and 

address in your message. 

• Mail/commercial/hand delivery: 

Mail or deliver your comments to: 

Marvin Duncan, USDA, Office of the 

Chief Economist, Office of Energy Policy 

and New Uses, Room 4059, South 

Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, 

SW., MS–3815, Washington, DC 20250– 

3815. 

• Persons with disabilities who 

require alternative means for 

communication for regulatory 

information (braille, large print, 

audiotape, etc.) should contact the 

USDA TARGET Center at (202)720– 

2600 (voice) and (202)401–4133 (TDD). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marvin Duncan, USDA, Office of the 

Chief Economist, Office of Energy Policy 

and New Uses, Room 4059, South 

Building, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW., MS–3815, Washington, DC 20250– 

3815; e-mail: mduncan@oce.usda.gov; 

phone (202) 401–0461. Information 

regarding the Federal Biobased Products 

Preferred Procurement Program is 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information presented in this preamble 

is organized as follows: 

I. Authority 

II. Background 

III. Summary of Today’s Proposed 

Rulemaking 

IV. Designation of Items, Minimum Biobased 

Contents, and Time Frame 

A. Background 

B. Items Proposed for Designation 

C. Minimum Biobased Contents 

D. Effective Date for Procurement 

Preference and Incorporation Into 

Specifications 

V. Where Can Agencies Get More Information 

on These USDA-Designated Items? 

VI. Regulatory Information 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

C. Executive Order 12630: Governmental 

Actions and Interference With 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights 

D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice 

Reform 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

G. Executive Order 12372: 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs 

H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

I. Paperwork Reduction Act 

J. E-Government Act Compliance 

I. Authority 

The designation of these items is 

proposed under the authority of section 

9002 of the Farm Security and Rural 

Investment Act of 2002 (FSRIA), 7 

U.S.C. 8102 (referred to in this 

document as ‘‘section 9002’’). 

II. Background 

Section 9002 of FSRIA, as amended 

by section 943 of the Energy Policy Act 

of 2005, Pub. L. 109–58 (Energy Policy 

Act), provides for the preferred 

procurement of biobased products by 

procuring agencies. Section 943 of the 

Energy Policy Act amended the 

definitions section of FSRIA, 7 U.S.C. 

8101, by adding a definition of 

‘‘procuring agency’’ that includes both 

Federal agencies and ‘‘any person 

contracting with any Federal agency 

with respect to work performed under 

that contract.’’ The amendment also 

made Federal contractors, as well as 

Federal agencies, expressly subject to 

the procurement preference provisions 

of section 9002 of FSRIA. However, 

because this program requires agencies 

to incorporate the preference for 

biobased products into procurement 

specifications, the statutory amendment 

makes no substantive change to the 

program. USDA amended the 

Guidelines to incorporate the new 

definition of ‘‘procuring agency’’ 

through an interim final rule. 

Procuring agencies must procure 

biobased products within each 

designated item unless they determine 

that products within a designated item 

are not reasonably available within a 

reasonable period of time, fail to meet 

the reasonable performance standards of 

the procuring agencies, or are available 

only at an unreasonable price. As stated 

in the Guidelines, biobased products 

that are merely incidental to Federal 

funding are excluded from the preferred 

procurement program. In implementing 

the preferred procurement program for 

biobased products, procuring agencies 

should follow their procurement rules 

and Office of Federal Procurement 

Policy guidance on buying non-biobased 

products when biobased products exist 

and should document exceptions taken 

for price, performance, and availability. 

USDA recognizes that the 

performance needs for a given 

application are important criteria in 

making procurement decisions. USDA is 

not requiring procuring agencies to limit 

their choices to biobased products that 

fall under the items for designation in 

this proposed rule. Rather, the effect of 

the designation of the items is to require 

procuring agencies to determine their 

performance needs, determine whether 

there are qualified biobased products 

that fall under the designated items that 

meet the reasonable performance 

standards for those needs, and purchase 

such qualified biobased products to the 

maximum extent practicable as required 

by section 9002. 

Section 9002 also requires USDA to 

provide information to procuring 

agencies on the availability, relative 

price, performance, and environmental 

and public health benefits of such items 

and, under section 9002(e)(1)(c), to 

recommend where appropriate the 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59863 

minimum level of biobased content to 

be contained in the procured products. 

Overlap with EPA Comprehensive 

Procurement Guidelines program for 

recovered content products. Some of the 

biobased items designated for preferred 

procurement may overlap with products 

designated under the Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) 

Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines 

program for recovered content products. 

Where that occurs, an EPA-designated 

recovered content product (also known 

as ‘‘recycled content products’’ or ‘‘EPAdesignated products’’) has priority in 

Federal procurement over the qualifying 

biobased product. In situations where 

USDA believes there may be an overlap, 

it plans to ask manufacturers of 

qualifying biobased products to provide 

additional product and performance 

information including the various 

suggested uses of their product and the 

performance standards against which a 

particular product has been tested. In 

addition, depending on the type of 

biobased product, manufacturers may 

also be asked to provide other types of 

information, such as whether the 

product contains petroleum-, coal-, or 

natural gas-based components and 

whether the product contains recovered 

materials. Federal agencies may also ask 

manufacturers for information on a 

product’s biobased content and its 

profile against environmental and 

human health measures and life cycle 

costs (the Building for Environmental 

and Economic Sustainability (BEES) 

analysis or ASTM International (ASTM) 

Standard D7075 for evaluating and 

reporting on environmental 

performance of biobased products). 

Such information will assist Federal 

agencies in determining whether the 

biobased products in question are, or are 

not, the same products for the same uses 

as the recovered content products and 

will be available on USDA’s Web site 

with its catalog of qualifying biobased 

products. 

Where a biobased item is used for the 

same purposes and to meet the same 

requirements as an EPA-designated 

recovered content product, the Federal 

agency must purchase the recovered 

content product. For example, if a 

biobased hydraulic fluid is to be used as 

a fluid in hydraulic systems and 

because ‘‘lubricating oils containing rerefined oil’’ has already been designated 

by EPA for that purpose, then the 

Federal agency must purchase the EPAdesignated recovered content product, 

‘‘lubricating oils containing re-refined 

oil.’’ If, on the other hand, that biobased 

hydraulic fluid is to be used to address 

certain environmental or health 

requirements that the EPA-designated 

recovered content product would not 

meet, then the biobased product should 

be given preference, subject to cost, 

availability, and performance. 

Federal Government Purchase of 

‘‘Green’’ Products. Three components of 

the Federal government’s green 

purchasing program are the Biobased 

Products Preferred Purchasing Program, 

the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines 

for products containing recovered 

materials, and the Environmentally 

Preferable Products Program. The Office 

of the Federal Environmental Executive 

(OFEE) and the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) encourage agencies 

to implement these components 

comprehensively when purchasing 

products and services. 

Procuring agencies should note that 

not all biobased products are 

‘‘environmentally preferable.’’ For 

example, unless cleaning products 

contain no or reduced levels of metals 

and toxic and hazardous constituents, 

they can be harmful to aquatic life, the 

environment, or workers. When 

purchasing environmentally preferable 

cleaning products, many Federal 

agencies specify that products must 

meet Green Seal standards for 

institutional cleaning products or that 

products have been reformulated in 

accordance with recommendations from 

the U.S. EPA’s Design for the 

Environment (DfE) program. Both the 

Green Seal standards and the DfE 

program identify chemicals of concern 

in cleaning products. These include 

zinc and other metals, formaldehyde, 

ammonia, alkyl phenol ethoxylates, 

ethylene glycol, and volatile organic 

compounds. In addition, both require 

that cleaning products have neutral or 

less caustic pH. 

On the other hand, some biobased 

products may be better for the 

environment than some products that 

meet Green Seal standards for 

institutional cleaning products or that 

have been reformulated in accordance 

with EPA’s DfE program. To fully 

compare products, one must look at the 

‘‘cradle-to-grave’’ impacts of the 

manufacture, use, and disposal of 

products. Biobased products that will be 

available for preferred procurement 

under this program have been assessed 

as to their ‘‘cradle-to-grave’’ impacts. 

One consideration of a product’s 

impact on the environment is whether 

it introduces (and to what degree) new, 

fossil carbon into the atmosphere. 

Qualifying biobased products offer the 

user the opportunity to manage the 

carbon cycle and limit the introduction 

of new, fossil carbon into the 

atmosphere, whereas non-biobased 

products derived from fossil fuels add 

new, fossil carbon to the atmosphere. 

Manufacturers of qualifying biobased 

products under the Federal Biobased 

Products Preferred Procurement 

Program (FB4P) will be able to provide, 

at the request of Federal agencies, 

factual information on environmental 

and human health effects of their 

products, including the results of the 

BEES analysis, which examines 11 

different environmental parameters, 

including human health, or the 

comparable ASTM D7505. Therefore, 

USDA encourages Federal procurement 

agencies to examine all available 

information on the environmental and 

human health effects of products when 

making their purchasing decisions. 

Green Building Council. More than a 

dozen Federal agencies use the U.S. 

Green Building Council’s Leadership in 

Energy and Environmental Design 

(LEED) Green Building Rating Systems 

for new construction, building 

renovation, and building operation and 

maintenance. The systems provide 

criteria for implementing sustainable 

design principles in building design, 

construction, operation, and 

maintenance. Points are assigned to 

each criterion, and building projects can 

be certified to be ‘‘certified,’’ ‘‘silver,’’

‘‘gold,’’ or ‘‘platinum’’ depending on the 

number of points for which the project 

qualifies. LEED for New Construction 

and Major Renovations (LEED-NC) 

includes a ‘‘Materials & Resources’’

criterion, with one point allocated for 

the use of rapidly renewable materials. 

Thus, the use of biobased construction 

products can help agencies obtain LEED 

certification for their building 

construction projects. 

Interagency Council. USDA has 

created, and is chairing, an ‘‘interagency 

council,’’ with membership selected 

from among Federal stakeholders to the 

FB4P. To augment its own research, 

USDA consults with this council in 

identifying the order of item 

designation, manufacturers producing 

and marketing products that fall within 

an item proposed for designation, 

performance standards used by Federal 

agencies evaluating products to be 

procured, and warranty information 

used by manufacturers of end user 

equipment and other products with 

regard to biobased products. 

Other Preferred Procurement 

Programs. Federal procurement officials 

should also note that biobased products 

may be available for purchase by 

Federal agencies through the JavitsWagner-O’Day (JWOD) program. Under 

this program, members of organizations 

including the National Industries for the 

Blind and the National Industries for the 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59864 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

Severely Handicapped offer products 

and services for preferred procurement 

by Federal agencies. A search of the 

JWOD online catalog (www.jwod.com) 

indicated that three of the items being 

proposed today (bath and tile cleaners, 

floor strippers, and laundry products) 

are available through the JWOD 

program. While none of the specific 

products within these items are 

identified in the JWOD online catalog as 

being biobased products, it is possible 

that biobased products are available or 

will be available in the future. Also, 

because additional categories of 

products are frequently added to the 

JWOD program, it is possible that 

biobased products within other items 

being proposed for designation today 

may be available through the JWOD 

program in the future. Procurement of 

biobased products through the JWOD 

program would further the objectives of 

both the JWOD program and the FB4P 

program. 

III. Summary of Today’s Proposed 

Rulemaking 

Today, USDA is proposing to 

designate the following 10 items for 

preferred procurement: Bath and tile 

cleaners; clothing products; concrete 

and asphalt release fluids; cutting, 

drilling, and tapping oils; de-icers; 

durable films; firearm lubricants; floor 

strippers; laundry products; and wood 

and concrete sealers. USDA is also 

proposing minimum biobased content 

for each of these items (see Section 

IV.C). Lastly, USDA is proposing a date 

by which Federal agencies must 

incorporate designated items into their 

procurement specifications (see Section 

IV.D). 

In today’s proposed rulemaking, 

USDA is providing information on its 

findings as to the availability, economic 

and technical feasibility, environmental 

and public health benefits, and life 

cycle costs for each of the 10 designated 

items. Information on the availability, 

relative price, performance, and 

environmental and public health 

benefits of individual products within 

each of these 10 items is not presented 

in this notice. Further, USDA has 

reached an agreement with 

manufacturers not to publish their 

names in the Federal Register when 

designating items. This agreement was 

reached to encourage manufacturers to 

submit products for testing to support 

the designation of an item. Once an item 

has been designated, USDA will 

encourage the manufacturers of 

products within the designated item to 

voluntarily post their names and other 

contact information on the USDA FB4P 

Web site. 

Warranties. Some of the items being 

proposed for designation today may 

affect maintenance warranties. As time 

and resources allow, USDA will work 

with manufacturers on addressing any 

effect the use of biobased products may 

have on maintenance warranties. At this 

time, however, USDA does not have 

information available as to whether or 

not the manufacturers will state that the 

use of these products will void 

maintenance warranties. USDA 

encourages manufacturers of biobased 

products to work with original 

equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to 

ensure that biobased products will not 

void maintenance warranties when 

used. USDA is willing to assist 

manufacturers of the biobased products, 

if they find that existing performance 

standards for maintenance warranties 

are not relevant or appropriate for 

biobased products, in working with the 

appropriate OEMs to develop tests that 

are relevant and appropriate for the end 

uses in which biobased products are 

intended. If despite these efforts there is 

insufficient information regarding the 

use of a biobased product and its effect 

of maintenance warranties, USDA notes 

that the procurement agent would not 

be required to buy such a product. As 

information is available on warranties, 

USDA will make such information 

available on its FB4P Web site. 

Additional Information. USDA is 

working with manufacturers and 

vendors to post all relevant product and 

manufacturer contact information on the 

FB4P Web site before a procuring 

agency asks for it, in order to make the 

preferred program more efficient. Steps 

USDA has implemented, or will 

implement, include: making direct 

contact with submitting companies 

through email and phone conversations 

to encourage completion of product 

listing; coordinating outreach efforts 

with intermediate material producers to 

encourage participation of their 

customer base; conducting targeted 

outreach with industry and commodity 

groups to educate stakeholders on the 

importance of providing complete 

product information; participating in 

industry conferences and meetings to 

educate companies on program benefits 

and requirements; and communicating 

the potential for expanded markets 

beyond the Federal government, to 

include State and local governments, as 

well as the general public markets. 

Section V provides instructions to 

agencies on how to obtain this 

information on products within these 

items through the following Web site: 

http://www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. 

Comments. USDA invites comment 

on the proposed designation of these 10 

items, including the definition, 

proposed minimum biobased content, 

and any of the relevant analyses 

performed during the selection of these 

items. In addition, USDA invites 

comments and information in the 

following areas: 

1. One of the items being proposed for 

designation (durable plastic films) may 

overlap with one of the products 

designated under EPA’s Comprehensive 

Procurement Guidelines for products 

containing recovered material. To help 

procuring agencies in making their 

purchasing decisions between biobased 

products within the proposed 

designated items that overlap with 

products containing recovered material, 

USDA is requesting product specific 

information on unique performance 

attributes, environmental and human 

health effects, disposal costs, and other 

attributes that would distinguish 

biobased products from products 

containing recovered material as well as 

non-biobased products. 

2. De-icers are used in a variety of 

applications and settings. In today’s 

proposed rulemaking, this item would 

not apply to de-icers used at airports to 

de-ice airplanes and runways. USDA is 

seeking comment on whether this is 

appropriate; that is, whether there are 

differences in the de-icers used at 

airports and the de-icers used elsewhere 

that would preclude this item from 

including airport de-icers. Please 

provide detailed rationale and 

information to support your comments. 

3. We are proposing a single item 

designation for bath and tile cleaners. 

We are seeking comment as to whether 

there are different performance 

standards for this item and, if so, 

whether USDA should consider either 

creating subcategories within this item, 

each with its own minimum biobased 

content, or limiting the scope of the 

current item and proposing one or more 

new items for bath and tile cleaners. In 

your comments, please be sure to 

identify specific performance standards 

and rationale for either subdividing the 

current proposed item or for limiting the 

scope of the current proposed item and 

proposing one or more new items for 

bath and tile cleaners. 

4. We have attempted to identify 

relevant and appropriate performance 

standards and other relevant measures 

of performance for each of the proposed 

items. If you know of other such 

standards or relevant measures of 

performance for the proposed items, 

USDA requests that you submit 

information identifying such standards 

and measures, including their name 

(and other identifying information as 

necessary), identifying who is using the 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59865 

standard/measure, and describing the 

circumstances under which the product 

is being used. 

5. We are proposing a minimum 

biobased content for biobased clothing 

based on a projected blend of biobased 

material with non-qualifying biobased 

material or with non-biobased material. 

USDA requests information from 

manufacturers of biobased clothing on 

what blends are being used today or that 

might be reasonably forecast to be used 

in the future. Please provide specific 

information, including discussion on 

why you use or will use particular 

blends and what those blends levels are 

or are projected to be. 

6. Many biobased products within the 

items being proposed for designation 

will have positive environmental and 

human health attributes. USDA is 

seeking comments on such attributes in 

order to provide additional information 

on the FB4P Web site. This information 

will then be available to Federal 

procuring agencies and will assist them 

in making ‘‘best value’’ purchase 

decisions. When possible, please 

provide appropriate documentation to 

support the environmental and human 

health attributes you describe. 

To assist you in developing your 

comments, the background information 

used in proposing these items for 

designation can be found on the FB4P 

Web site. All comments should be 

submitted as directed in the ADDRESSES

section above. 

IV. Designation of Items, Minimum 

Biobased Contents, and Time Frame 

A. Background 

In order to designate items (generic 

groupings of specific products such as 

crankcase oils or products that contain 

qualifying biobased fibers) for preferred 

procurement, section 9002 requires 

USDA to consider: (1) The availability 

of items; and (2) the economic and 

technological feasibility of using the 

items, including the life cycle costs of 

the items. 

In considering an item’s availability, 

USDA uses several sources of 

information. USDA performs Internet 

searches, contacts trade associations 

(such as the Biobased Manufacturers 

Association) and commodity groups, 

searches the Thomas Register (a 

database, used as a resource for finding 

companies and products manufactured 

in North America, containing over 

173,000 entries), and contacts 

individual manufacturers and vendors 

to identify those manufacturers and 

vendors with biobased products within 

items being considered for designation. 

USDA uses the results of these same 

searches to determine if an item is 

generally available. 

In considering an item’s economic 

and technological feasibility, USDA 

examines evidence pointing to the 

general commercial use of an item and 

its cost and performance characteristics. 

This information is obtained from the 

sources used to assess an item’s 

availability. Commercial use, in turn, is 

evidenced by any manufacturer and 

vendor information on the availability, 

relative prices, and performance of their 

products as well as by evidence of an 

item being purchased by a procuring 

agency or other entity, where available. 

In sum, USDA considers an item 

economically and technologically 

feasible for purposes of designation if 

products within that item are being 

offered and used in the marketplace. 

In considering the life cycle costs of 

items proposed for designation, USDA 

uses the BEES analytical tool to test 

individual products within each 

proposed item. (Detailed information on 

this analytical tool can be found on the 

Web site http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/ 

software/bees.html.) The BEES 

analytical tool measures the 

environmental performance and the 

economic performance of a product. 

Environmental performance is 

measured in the BEES analytical tool 

using the internationally-standardized 

and science-based life cycle assessment 

approach specified in the International 

Organization for Standardization (ISO) 

14000 standards. The BEES 

environmental performance analysis 

includes human health as one of its 

components. All stages in the life of a 

product are analyzed: Raw material 

production; manufacture; 

transportation; installation; use; and 

recycling and waste management. The 

time period over which environmental 

performance is measured begins with 

raw material production and ends with 

disposal (waste management). The BEES 

environmental performance analysis 

also addresses products made from 

biobased feedstocks. 

Economic performance in the BEES 

analysis is measured using the ASTM 

standard life cycle cost method (ASTM 

E917), which covers the costs of initial 

investment, replacement, operation, 

maintenance and repair, and disposal. 

The time frame for economic 

performance extends from the purchase 

of the product to final disposal. 

USDA then utilizes the BEES results 

of individual products within a 

designated item in its consideration of 

the life cycle costs at the item level. 

There is a single unit of comparison 

associated with each designated item. 

The basis for the unit of comparison is 

the ‘‘functional unit,’’ defined so that 

the products compared are true 

substitutes for one another. If significant 

differences have been identified in the 

useful lives of alternative products 

within a designated item (e.g., if one 

product lasts twice as long as another), 

the functional unit will include 

reference to a time dimension to 

account for the frequency of product 

replacement. The functional unit also 

will account for products used in 

different amounts for equivalent service. 

For example, one surface coating 

product may be environmentally and 

economically preferable to another on a 

pound-for-pound basis, but may require 

twice the mass to cover one square foot 

of surface, and last half as long, as the 

other product. To account for these 

performance differences, the functional 

unit for the surface coating item could 

be ‘‘one square foot of application for 20 

years’’ instead of ‘‘one pound of surface 

coating product.’’ The functional unit 

provides the critical reference point to 

which all BEES results for products 

within an item are scaled. Because 

functional units vary from item to item, 

performance comparisons are valid only 

among products within a designated 

item. 

The complete results of the BEES 

analysis, extrapolated to the item level, 

for each item proposed for designation 

in today’s proposed rulemaking can be 

found at http:// 

www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. 

As discussed above, the BEES 

analysis includes information on the 

environmental performance, human 

health impacts, and economic 

performance. In addition, ASTM D7505, 

which manufacturers may use in lieu of 

the BEES analytical tool, provides 

similar information. USDA is working 

with manufacturers and vendors to post 

this information on the FB4P Web site 

before a procuring agency asks for it, in 

order to make the preferred 

procurement program more efficient. As 

discussed earlier, USDA has also 

implemented, or will implement, 

several other steps intended to educate 

the manufacturers and other 

stakeholders on the benefits of this 

program and the need to post this 

information, including manufacturer 

contact information, on the FB4P Web 

site to make it available to procurement 

officials. Additional information on 

specific products within the items 

proposed for designation may also be 

obtained directly from the 

manufacturers of the products. 

USDA recognizes that information 

related to the functional performance of 

biobased products is a primary factor in 

making the decision to purchase these 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59866 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

products. USDA is gathering from 

manufacturers of biobased products 

being considered for designation 

information on industry standard test 

methods that they are using to evaluate 

the functional performance of their 

products. Additional standards are also 

being identified during meetings of the 

Interagency council and during the 

review process for each proposed rule. 

We have listed under the detailed 

discussion of each item proposed for 

designation (presented in Section IV.B) 

the functional performance test methods 

identified during the development of 

this Federal Register notice for these 10 

items. While this process identifies 

many of the relevant standards, USDA 

recognizes that the performance test 

methods identified herein do not 

represent all of the methods that may be 

applicable for a designated item or for 

any individual product within the 

designated item. As noted earlier in this 

preamble, USDA is requesting 

identification of other relevant 

performance standards and measures of 

performance. As the program becomes 

fully implemented, these and other 

additional relevant performance 

standards will be available on the FB4P 

Web site. 

In gathering information relevant to 

the analyses discussed above, USDA has 

made extensive efforts to contact and 

request information and product 

samples from representatives of all 

known manufacturers of products 

within the items proposed for 

designation. However, because the 

submission of information is on a 

strictly voluntary basis, USDA was able 

to obtain information and samples only 

from those manufacturers who were 

willing voluntarily to invest the 

resources required to gather and submit 

the information and samples. USDA 

used the samples to test for biobased 

content and the information to conduct 

the BEES analyses. The data presented 

are all the data that were submitted in 

response to USDA requests for 

information from all known 

manufacturers of the products within 

the 10 items proposed for designation. 

While USDA would prefer to have 

complete data on the full range of 

products within each item, the data that 

were submitted are sufficient to support 

designation of the items in today’s 

proposed rulemaking. 

To propose an item for designation, 

USDA must have sufficient information 

on a sufficient number of products 

within an item to be able to assess its 

availability and its economic and 

technological feasibility, including its 

life cycle costs. For some items, there 

may be numerous products available. 

For other items, there may be very few 

products currently available. Given the 

infancy of the market for some items, it 

is not unexpected that even singleproduct items will be identified. 

Further, given that the intent of section 

9002 is largely to stimulate the 

production of new biobased products 

and to energize emerging markets for 

those products, USDA has determined 

that the identification of two or more 

biobased products within an item, or 

even a single product with two or more 

suppliers, is sufficient to consider the 

designation of that item. Similarly, the 

documented availability, benefits, and 

life cycle costs of even a very small 

percentage of all products that may exist 

within an item are also considered 

sufficient to support designation. 

B. Items Proposed for Designation 

USDA uses a model (as summarized 

below) to identify and prioritize items 

for designation. Through this model, 

USDA has identified over 100 items for 

potential designation under the 

preferred procurement program. A list 

of these items and information on the 

model can be accessed on the USDA 

biobased program Web site at http:// 

www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. 

In general, items are developed and 

prioritized for designation by evaluating 

them against program criteria 

established by USDA and by gathering 

information from other government 

agencies, private industry groups, and 

independent manufacturers. These 

evaluations begin by asking the 

following questions about the products 

within an item: 

• Are they cost competitive with nonbiobased products? 

• Do they meet industry performance 

standards? 

• Are they readily available on the 

commercial market? 

In addition to these primary concerns, 

USDA then considers the following 

points: 

• Are there manufacturers interested 

in providing the necessary test 

information on products within a 

particular item? 

• Are there a number of 

manufacturers producing biobased 

products in this item? 

• Are there products available in this 

item? 

• What level of difficulty is expected 

when designating this item? 

• Is there Federal demand for the 

product? 

• Are Federal procurement personnel 

looking for biobased products? 

• Will an item create a high demand 

for biobased feed stock? 

• Does manufacturing of products 

within this item increase potential for 

rural development? 

After completing this evaluation, 

USDA prioritizes the list of items for 

designation. USDA then gathers 

information on products within the 

highest priority items and, as sufficient 

information becomes available for 

groups of approximately 10 items, a new 

rulemaking package will be developed 

to designate the items within that group. 

The list of items may change, with items 

being added or dropped, and the order 

in which items are proposed for 

designation is likely to change because 

the information necessary to designate 

an item may take more time to obtain 

than an item lower on the list. 

In today’s proposed rulemaking, 

USDA is proposing to designate 10 

items for the preferred procurement 

program: Bath and tile cleaners; clothing 

products; concrete and asphalt release 

fluids; cutting, drilling, and tapping 

oils; de-icers; durable films; firearm 

lubricants; floor strippers; laundry 

products; and wood and concrete 

sealers. USDA has determined that each 

of these 10 items meets the necessary 

statutory requirements—namely, that 

they are being produced with biobased 

products and that their procurement by 

procuring agencies will carry out the 

following objectives of section 9002: 

• To increase demand for biobased 

products, which would in turn increase 

demand for agricultural commodities 

that can serve as feedstocks for the 

production of biobased products; 

• To spur development of the 

industrial base through value-added 

agricultural processing and 

manufacturing in rural communities; 

and 

• To enhance the Nation’s energy 

security by substituting biobased 

products for products derived from 

imported oil and natural gas. 

Further, USDA has sufficient 

information on these 10 items to 

determine their availability and to 

conduct the requisite analyses to 

determine their biobased content and 

their economic and technological 

feasibility, including life cycle costs. 

Mature Markets. Section 2902.5(c)(2) 

of the final guidelines states that USDA 

will not designate items for preferred 

procurement that are determined to 

have mature markets. Mature markets 

are described as items that had 

significant national market penetration 

in 1972. USDA contacted 

manufacturers, manufacturing 

associations, and industry researchers to 

determine if, in 1972, biobased products 

had a significant market share within 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59867 

any of the items proposed for 

designation today. USDA found that 

biobased products within none of the 10 

items proposed for designation today 

had a significant market share in 1972 

and that, generally, the companies that 

produce biobased products within these 

proposed designated items have been in 

business for only 10 to 20 years. 

Overlap with EPA-Designated 

Recovered Content Products. In today’s 

proposed rule, one of the 10 items may 

overlap with the EPA-designated 

recovered content product ‘‘Nonpaper 

Office Products: Plastic trash bags.’’

This item is durable plastic films. For 

this item, USDA is requesting that 

certain information on the qualifying 

biobased products be made available by 

its manufacturers to assist Federal 

agencies in determining if an overlap 

exists between durable plastic films and 

plastic trash bags (the applicable EPAdesignated recovered content product). 

As noted earlier in this preamble, USDA 

is requesting information on overlap 

situations to further help procuring 

agencies make informed decisions when 

faced with purchasing a recovered 

content material product or a biobased 

product. As this information is 

developed, USDA will make it available 

on the FB4P Web site. 

Exemptions. When proposing items 

for preferred procurement under the 

FB4P, USDA will identify, on an itemby-item basis, any item that would be 

exempt from preferred procurement on 

the basis of their use in products and 

systems designed or procured for 

combat or combat-related missions. 

USDA believes it is inappropriate to 

apply the biobased purchasing 

requirement to tactical equipment 

unless the Department of Defense has 

documented that these products can 

meet the performance requirements for 

such equipment and are available in 

sufficient supply to meet domestic and 

overseas deployment needs. After 

evaluating these situations for each of 

the 10 items being proposed for 

designation, USDA is proposing to 

exempt firearm lubricants, de-icers, and 

clothing products from preferred 

procurement under the FB4P when used 

in combat or combat-related missions. 

USDA is proposing an exemption for 

all designated items when used in 

spacecraft systems and launch support 

equipment, because failure of such 

items could lead to catastrophic 

consequences. Many, if not all, items 

that USDA is or is planning to designate 

for preferred procurement are or will be 

used in space applications. Frequently, 

such applications used these items in 

ways that are different from their more 

‘‘conventional’’ use on Earth. It is 

difficult, if not impossible, to forecast 

what situations may occur when these 

items are used in space and how they 

will perform. Therefore, USDA believes 

it is reasonable to limit the preferred 

procurement program to items used in 

more conventional applications and is 

proposing to exempt all designated 

items used in space applications from 

the FB4P. 

For each item being proposed for 

exemption, the exemption does not 

extend to contractors performing work 

for DoD or NASA. For example, if a 

contractor is producing a part for use on 

the space shuttle, the metalworking 

fluid the contractor uses to produce the 

part should be biobased (provided it 

meets the specifications for 

metalworking). The exemption does 

apply, however, if the product being 

purchased by the contractor is for use in 

combat or combat-related missions or 

for use in space applications. For 

example, if the part being produced by 

the contractor would actually be part of 

the space shuttle, then the exemption 

applies. 

Each of the 10 proposed designated 

items are discussed in the following 

sections. 

1. Bath and Tile Cleaners 

Bath and tile cleaners are products 

designed to clean deposits on bath tubs, 

shower doors, shower curtains, 

bathroom tiles, floors, doors, counter 

tops, etc. They are available both in 

concentrated and ready-to-use forms. 

As noted earlier in this preamble, 

USDA is requesting comment on 

whether there should be one or more 

subcategories within this item based on 

required performance properties of the 

item. For example, bath and tile 

cleaners used in medical situations 

might be required to meet different 

performance standards from those used 

in households. If this is the case, then 

there may be differences in the level of 

biobased content depending on the 

performance standard to be met. As 

proposed, USDA is not differentiating 

between settings in which bath and tile 

cleaners are used. 

Procuring agencies should note that, 

as discussed in section II of this 

preamble, not all biobased cleaning 

products are ‘‘environmentally 

preferable’’ to non-biobased products. 

Unless cleaning products have been 

formulated to contain no (or reduced 

levels of) metals and toxic and 

hazardous constituents, they can be 

harmful to aquatic life, the environment, 

or workers. When purchasing 

environmentally preferable cleaning 

products, Federal agencies must 

compare the ‘‘cradle-to-grave’’ impacts 

of the manufacture, use, and disposal of 

both biobased and non-biobased 

products. 

For bath and tile cleaners, USDA 

identified 16 different manufacturers 

producing 29 individual biobased 

products. These 16 manufacturers do 

not necessarily include all 

manufacturers of biobased bath and tile 

cleaners, merely those identified during 

USDA information gathering activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that these 

products are typically tested against an 

industry performance standard and are 

being used commercially. While other 

applicable performance standards may 

exist, applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• Boeing Specification #D6–7127, 

Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 

Transport Aircraft. 

• Green Seal #GS–37, Green Seal 

Environmental Standard for GeneralPurpose, Bathroom, Glass, and Carpet 

Cleaners Used for Industrial and 

Institutional Purposes. 

USDA contacted procurement 

officials with various procuring agencies 

including GSA, several offices within 

the Defense Logistics Agency, the OFEE, 

USDA Departmental Administration, 

the National Park Service, EPA, Oak 

Ridge National Laboratory, and OMB in 

an effort to gather information on the 

purchases of bath and tile cleaners and 

products within the other nine items 

proposed for designation today. 

Communications with these officials 

lead to the conclusion that obtaining 

credible current usage statistics and 

specific potential markets within the 

Federal government for biobased 

products within the 10 proposed 

designated items is not possible at this 

time. Most of the contacted officials 

reported that procurement data are 

reported in higher level groupings of 

materials and supplies than the 

proposed designated items. Also, the 

purchasing of such materials as part of 

contracted services and with individual 

purchase cards used to purchase 

products locally further obscures 

credible data on purchases of specific 

products. 

USDA also investigated the Web site 

FEDBIZOPPS.gov, a site which lists 

Federal contract purchase opportunities 

greater than $25,000. The information 

provided on this Web site, however, is 

for broad categories of products rather 

than the specific types of products that 

are included in today’s rulemaking. 

Therefore, USDA has been unable to 

obtain data on the amount of bath and 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59868 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

tile cleaners purchased by procuring 

agencies. However, Federal agencies 

routinely perform cleaning activities, or 

procure contract services, for cleaning 

their bathroom facilities. Thus, they 

have a need for bath and tile cleaners 

and for services that require the use of 

bath and tile cleaners. Designation of 

bath and tile cleaners will promote the 

use of biobased products, furthering the 

objectives of this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased bath and tile cleaners 

was performed for two of the products 

using the BEES analytical tool. Table 1 

summarizes the BEES results for the two 

bath and tile cleaners. As seen in Table 

1, the environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, ranges 

from 0.0129 to 0.0130 points per gallon 

of bath and tile cleaner. The 

environmental performance score 

indicates the share of annual per capita 

U.S. environmental impacts that is 

attributable to one gallon of the product, 

expressed in 100ths of 1 percent. For 

example, the total amount of criteria air 

pollutants emitted in the U.S. in one 

year was divided by the total U.S. 

population to derive a ‘‘criteria air 

pollutants per person value.’’ The 

production and use of one gallon of bath 

and tile cleaner sample A was estimated 

to contribute 0.000002 percent of this 

value. 

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR BATH AND TILE CLEANERS

Parameters 

Bath and tile cleaners 

Sample A Sample B 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score1 .............................................................................................. 0 .0130 0 .0129 

Acidification (5%) .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0002 0 .0001 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ............................................................................................................................. 0 .0004 0 .0052 

Eutrophication (5%) ...................................................................................................................................... 0 .0044 0 .0003 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0029 0 .0031 

Global Warming (16%) ................................................................................................................................. 0 .0024 0 .0011 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ............................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .................................................................................................................................... 0 .0010 0 .0013 

Indoor Air (11%) ........................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) .................................................................................................................................. 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0015 0 .0005 

Water Intake (3%) ........................................................................................................................................ 0 .0002 0 .0013 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs ($)) 2 .................................................................................................. 1 .69 7 .43 

First Cost ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 .69 7 .43 

Future Cost (3.9%) ....................................................................................................................................... (3) (3) 

Functional Unit ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 gallon of bath and tile cleaner. 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 

When evaluating the information 

presented in Table 1, as well as in the 

subsequent tables presented in this 

preamble, it should be noted that 

comparisons of the environmental 

performance scores are valid only 

among products within a designated 

item. Thus, comparisons of the scores 

presented in Table 1 and the scores 

presented in tables for other proposed 

designated items are not meaningful. 

The numbers in parentheses following 

each of the 12 environmental impacts 

listed in the tables in this preamble 

indicate weighting factors. The 

weighting factors represent the relative 

importance of the 12 environmental 

impacts, including human health 

impacts, that contribute to the BEES 

Environmental Score. They are derived 

from lists of the relative importance of 

these impacts developed by the EPA 

Science Advisory Board for the purpose 

of advising EPA as to how best to 

allocate its limited resources among 

environmental impact areas. Note that a 

lower Environmental Performance score 

is better than a higher score. 

Life cycle costs presented in the tables 

in this preamble are per the appropriate 

functional unit for the proposed 

designated item. Future costs are 

discounted to present value using the 

OMB discount rate of 3.9 percent. 

The life cycle costs of the submitted 

bath and tile cleaners range from $1.69 

to $7.43 (present value dollars) per 

gallon. Present value dollars presented 

in this preamble represent the sum of all 

costs associated with a product over a 

fixed period of time, including any 

applicable costs for purchase, 

installation, replacement, operation, 

maintenance and repair, and disposal. 

Present value dollars presented in this 

preamble reflect 2006 dollars. Dollars 

are expressed in present value terms to 

adjust for the effects of inflation. The 

complete results of the BEES analysis, 

extrapolated to the item level, for each 

item proposed for designation in today’s 

proposed rulemaking can be found at 

http://www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. 

2. Clothing Products 

Clothing products are coverings 

designed to be worn on a person’s body. 

These products include coverings for 

the torso and limbs, as well as coverings 

for the hands, feet, and head. While this 

item applies to all types of clothing, 

some products within this item may not 

be applicable to specialized types of 

clothing, such as those categorized as 

person protective devices. Procuring 

agencies, therefore, need to assess an 

individual product’s performance 

specifications for applicability for such 

specialized types of clothing. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in products 

and systems designed or procured for 

combat or combat-related missions and 

in spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

For biobased clothing products, 

USDA identified 3 different 

manufacturers producing 5 individual 

biobased products. These 3 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59869 

manufacturers do not necessarily 

include all manufacturers of biobased 

clothing products, merely those 

identified during USDA information 

gathering activities. Information 

supplied by these manufacturers 

indicates that many of these products 

are typically tested against multiple 

industry standards and are being used 

commercially. While other applicable 

performance standards may exist, 

applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• NATICK Military Wicking Rate of 

Fabric; 

• NATICK Military Air Permeability; 

• NATICK Military Fabric Count; 

• NATICK Military Weight; 

• NATICK Military Seam Strength; 

• NATICK Military Burst Strength; 

• NATICK Military MVT Rate; 

• NATICK Military pH; and 

• NATICK Military Dimensional 

Stability. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, various Federal 

agencies procure clothing products for 

use by their employees. Thus, they have 

a need for clothing products. 

Designation of clothing products will 

promote the use of biobased products, 

furthering the objectives of this 

program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased clothing products was 

performed for one of the products using 

the BEES analytical tool. Table 2 

summarizes the BEES results for the 

clothing product. As seen in Table 2, the 

environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, is 0.0143 

points per one XL T-shirt. The 

environmental performance score 

indicates the share of annual per capita 

U.S. environmental impacts that is 

attributable to one case of the product, 

expressed in 100ths of 1 percent. 

TABLE 2.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR CLOTHING PRODUCTS

Parameters 

Clothing products 

Sample A 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ....................................................................................................................... 0 .0143 

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0001 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0010 

Eutrophication (5%) ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0002 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0073 

Global Warming (16%) ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0019 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0024 

Indoor Air (11%) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0006 

Water Intake (3%) .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0008 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs ($)) 2 ............................................................................................................................ 12 .50 

First Cost ................................................................................................................................................................................ 12 .50 

Future Cost (3.9%) ................................................................................................................................................................. (3) 

Functional Unit ........................................................................................................................................................................ (4) 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 4One XL T-shirt. 

The life cycle costs of the submitted 

clothing product is $12.50 (present 

value dollars) per XL T-shirt. 

3. Concrete and Asphalt Release Fluids 

Concrete and asphalt release fluids 

are products designed to provide a 

lubricating barrier between the 

composite surface materials (e.g., 

concrete or asphalt) and the container 

(e.g., wood or metal forms, truck beds, 

roller surfaces, etc.). They provide a 

non-sticking surface to help prevent 

waste and to improve clean up 

procedures. 

For reasons cited earlier in this notice, 

USDA is proposing to exempt this item 

from preferred procurement under FB4P 

when used in spacecraft systems and 

launch support equipment. 

For biobased concrete and asphalt 

release fluids, USDA identified 23 

different manufacturers producing 37 

individual products. These 23 

manufacturers do not necessarily 

include all manufacturers of biobased 

concrete and asphalt release fluids, 

merely those identified during USDA 

information gathering activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that these 

products are typically tested against 

multiple industry performance 

standards and are being used 

commercially. While other applicable 

performance standards may exist, 

applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• ASTM D445–04e2, Standard Test 

Method for Kinematic Viscosity of 

Transparent and Opaque Liquids (and 

the Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity); 

• ASTM 5864–00, Standard Test 

Method for Determining Aerobic 

Aquatic Biodegradation of Lubricants or 

Their Components; 

• ASTM D92, Standard Test Method 

for Flash and Fire Points by Cleveland 

Open Cup Tester; and 

• ASTM D97, Standard Test Method 

for Pour Point of Petroleum Products. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely procure such 

products for paving and construction, or 

contract for paving and construction 

services involving the use of such 

products. Thus, they have a need for 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59870 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

concrete and asphalt release fluids and 

for services that use concrete and 

asphalt release fluids. Designation of 

biobased concrete and asphalt release 

fluids will promote the use of biobased 

products, furthering the objectives of 

this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased concrete and asphalt 

release fluids was performed for two of 

the products using the BEES analytical 

tool. Table 3 summarizes the BEES 

results for the two biobased concrete 

and asphalt release fluids. As seen in 

Table 3, the environmental performance 

score, which includes human health, 

ranges from 0.5194 to 0.7453 points per 

1000 gallons of release product (diluted 

and ready for use). The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to 1000 

gallons of the product (diluted and 

ready for use), expressed in 100ths of 1 

percent. 

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR CONCRETE AND ASPHALT RELEASE FLUIDS

Parameters 

Concrete and asphalt release 

fluids 

Sample A Sample B 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ............................................................................................. 0 .7453 0 .5194 

Acidification (5%) .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .0001 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0077 0 .0053 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ............................................................................................................................. 0 .0827 0 .0252 

Eutrophication (5%) ...................................................................................................................................... 0 .0121 0 .0290 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .3097 0 .2624 

Global Warming (16%) ................................................................................................................................. 0 .0927 0 .0616 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ............................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .................................................................................................................................... 0 .1203 0 .0883 

Indoor Air (11%) ........................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) .................................................................................................................................. 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0526 0 .0123 

Water Intake (3%) ........................................................................................................................................ 0 .0674 0 .0353 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs ($)) 2 .................................................................................................. 604 .82 154 .97 

First Cost ...................................................................................................................................................... 604 .82 154 .97 

Future Cost (3.9%) ....................................................................................................................................... (3) (3) 

Functional Unit ..................................................................................................................................................... 1,000 gallons of release product 

(diluted and ready for use). 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

concrete and asphalt release fluids was 

$154.97 to $604.82 (present value 

dollars) per 1000 gallons of product, 

diluted and ready for use. 

4. Cutting, Drilling, and Tapping Oils 

Cutting, drilling, and tapping oils are 

products designed to provide 

lubrication and reduce wear and friction 

on the contact parts for cutting, drilling, 

and tapping machinery, helping these 

parts last longer. This item only applies 

to neat oils, and does not apply to water 

emulsions. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in products 

and systems designed or procured for 

spacecraft systems and launch support 

equipment. 

For biobased cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils, USDA identified 13 

different manufacturers producing 33 

individual biobased products. These 13 

manufacturers do not necessarily 

include all manufacturers of biobased 

cutting, drilling, and tapping oils, 

merely those identified during USDA 

information gathering activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that many of 

these products have been tested against 

multiple industry performance 

standards and are being used 

commercially. While other applicable 

performance standards may exist, 

applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• ASTM D130, Standard Test Method 

for Corrosiveness to Copper from 

Petroleum Products by Copper Strip 

Test; 

• ASTM D1401–02, Standard Test 

Method for Water Separability of 

Petroleum Oils and Synthetic Fluids; 

• ASTM D1748–02, Standard Test 

Method for Rust Protection by Metal 

Preservatives in the Humidity Cabinet; 

• ASTM D2266–01, Standard Test 

Method for Wear Preventive 

Characteristics of Lubricating Grease 

(Four-Ball Method); 

• ASTM D2270–04, Standard Practice 

for Calculating Viscosity Index From 

Kinematic Viscosity at 40 and 100 °C; 

• ASTM D2783–03, Standard Test 

Method for Measurement of ExtremePressure Properties of Lubricating 

Fluids (Four-Ball Method); 

• ASTM D287–92(2000)e1, Standard 

Test Method for API Gravity of Crude 

Petroleum and Petroleum Products 

(Hydrometer Method); 

• ASTM D2982–98(2004), Standard 

Test Method for Detecting Glycol-Base 

Antifreeze in Used Lubricating Oils; 

• ASTM D2983–04a, Standard Test 

Method for Low-Temperature Viscosity 

of Lubricants Measured by Brookfield 

Viscometer; 

• ASTM D3233–93(2003), Standard 

Test Methods for Measurement of 

Extreme Pressure Properties of Fluid 

Lubricants (Falex Pin and Vee Block 

Methods); 

• ASTM D455, Standard Test Method 

for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent 

and Opaque Liquids (and the 

Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity); 

• ASTM D56–05, Standard Test 

Method for Flash Point by Tag Closed 

Cup Tester; 

• ASTM D5864–00, Standard Test 

Method for Determining Aerobic 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59871 

Aquatic Biodegradation of Lubricants or 

Their Components; 

• ASTM D5985, Standard Test 

Method for Pour Point of Petroleum 

Products (Rotational Method); 

• ASTM D665, Standard Test Method 

for Rust-Preventing Characteristics of 

Inhibited Mineral Oil in the Presence of 

Water; 

• ASTM D92, Standard Test Method 

for Flash and Fire Points by Cleveland 

Open Cup Tester; 

• ASTM D97, Standard Test Method 

for Pour Point of Petroleum Products; 

• Environmental Protection Agency 

#600/4–90–027, Methods for Measuring 

the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and 

Receiving Waters to Freshwater and 

Marine Organisms; and 

• Environmental Protection Agency 

#560/6–82–003, Biodegradability. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely own and operate 

cutting, drilling, and tapping 

machinery. In addition, many Federal 

agencies contract for services involving 

the use of such equipment. Thus, they 

have a need for cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils and for services that require 

the use of machinery which requires 

cutting, drilling, and tapping oils. 

Designation of cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils will promote the use of 

biobased products, furthering the 

objectives of this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of cutting, drilling, and tapping 

oils was performed for two of the 

products using the BEES analytical tool. 

Table 4 summarizes the BEES results for 

the two tapping oils. As seen in Table 

4, the environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, ranges 

from 0.0296 to 0.0607 points per gallon 

of tapping oil. The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to one gallon 

of tapping oil, expressed in 100ths of 1 

percent. 

TABLE 4.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR CUTTING, DRILLING, AND TAPPING OILS

Parameters 

Cutting, drilling, and tapping oils 

Sample A Sample B 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ............................................................................................. 0 .0607 0 .0296 

Acidification (5%) .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0002 0 .0002 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ............................................................................................................................. 0 .0018 0 .0067 

Eutrophication (5%) ...................................................................................................................................... 0 .0003 0 .0051 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0163 0 .0070 

Global Warming (16%) ................................................................................................................................. 0 .0334 0 .0038 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ............................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .................................................................................................................................... 0 .0068 0 .0027 

Indoor Air (11%) ........................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) .................................................................................................................................. 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0012 0 .0017 

Water Intake (3%) ........................................................................................................................................ 0 .0007 0 .0024 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs($)) 2 ............................................................................................ 152 .15 20 .00 

First Cost ...................................................................................................................................................... 152 .15 20 .00 

Future Cost (3.9%) ....................................................................................................................................... (3) (3) 

Functional Unit ..................................................................................................................................................... One gallon of tapping oil 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

tapping oils range from $20.00 to 

$152.15 (present value dollars) per 

gallon of tapping oil. 

5. De-icers 

De-icers are agents that aid in the 

removal of snow and ice. For the 

purposes of this rulemaking, this 

category does not include de-icers used 

at airports to de-ice airplanes and 

runways. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in products 

and systems designed or procured for 

combat or combat-related missions and 

in spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

For biobased de-icers, USDA 

identified 3 different manufacturers 

producing 9 individual biobased 

products. These 3 manufacturers do not 

necessarily include all manufacturers of 

biobased de-icers, merely those 

identified during USDA information 

gathering activities. Information 

supplied by these manufacturers 

indicates that these products are 

typically tested against one or more 

industry performance standards and are 

being used commercially. While other 

applicable performance standards may 

exist, applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• National Association of Corrosion 

Engineers Standard TM–01–69 (1976 

rev.)—Standardizes immersion 

corrosion testing and provides a 

consensus on the technology in this 

field of laboratory corrosion testing; 

• Pacific Northwest Snowfighters—

Standard Methods for the Examination 

of Water and Wastewater; and 

• American Association of State 

Highway & Transportation Officials. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, many Federal 

agencies routinely perform, or procure 

contract services to perform, snow and 

ice removal activities. Thus, they have 

a need for de-icers. Designation of 

biobased de-icers will promote the use 

of biobased products, furthering the 

objectives of this program. 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59872 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased de-icers was 

performed for one of the products using 

the BEES analytical tool. Table 5 

summarizes the BEES results for this 

biobased de-icer. As seen in Table 5, the 

environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, is 0.0173 

points per 1,500 square yards of surface 

area. The environmental performance 

score indicates the share of annual per 

capita U.S. environmental impacts that 

is attributable to 1,500 square yards of 

surface area, expressed in 100ths of 1 

percent. 

TABLE 5.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR DE-ICERS

Parameters 

De-icer 

Sample A 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ....................................................................................................................... 0 .0173 

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0001 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0025 

Eutrophication (5%) ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0002 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0072 

Global Warming (16%) ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0024 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0037 

Indoor Air (11%) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0010 

Water Intake (3%) .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0002 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs($)) 2 ............................................................................................................................. 3 .75 

First Cost ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 .75 

Future Cost (3.9%) ................................................................................................................................................................. (3) 

Functional Unit ............................................................................................................................................................................... (4) 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 4 1,500 square yards of surface area. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

biodegradable cutlery was $3.75 

(present value dollars) per 1,500 square 

yards of surface area. 

6. Durable Plastic Films 

Durable plastic films are products 

such as bags and packaging materials. 

They are designed to resist water, 

ammonia, and other compounds, and do 

not readily biodegrade. This item 

applies to all types of applications, 

including construction barriers. 

However, some products within this 

item may not be applicable to all 

applications, such as construction 

barriers, which may require specific 

moisture protection properties. 

Procuring agencies, therefore, need to 

assess an individual product’s 

performance specifications before using 

in specific applications, such as 

construction barriers. 

Qualifying products within this item 

may overlap with the EPA-designated 

recovered content product: Nonpaper 

Office Products: Plastic trash bags. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in spacecraft 

systems and launch support equipment. 

For biobased durable plastic films, 

USDA identified 2 different 

manufacturers producing 2 individual 

biobased products. These 2 

manufacturers do not necessarily 

include all manufacturers of biobased 

durable plastic films, merely those 

identified during USDA information 

gathering activities. Information 

supplied by these manufacturers 

indicates that these products are 

typically tested against one relevant 

measure of performance and are being 

used commercially. While applicable 

performance standards and other 

measures of performance may exist, 

applicable industry performance 

standards and relevant measures of 

performance against which these 

products have been typically tested, as 

identified by manufacturers of products 

within this item and by others, include: 

• Building Performance Institute, Inc. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely utilize durable 

plastic films in a variety of applications, 

including building cleaning and 

maintenance, landscaping and 

construction activities, and packaging 

activities, or procure services that use 

these products. Thus, they have a need 

for durable plastic films and for services 

that require the use of durable plastic 

films. Designation of durable plastic 

films will promote the use of biobased 

products, furthering the objectives of 

this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased durable plastic films 

was performed for one of the products 

using the BEES analytical tool. Table 6 

summarizes the BEES results for this 

durable plastic film. As seen in Table 6, 

the environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, is 0.0125 

per kilogram of durable film. The 

environmental performance score 

indicates the share of annual per capita 

U.S. environmental impacts that is 

attributable to one kilogram of durable 

film, expressed in 100ths of 1 percent. 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59873 

TABLE 6.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR DURABLE PLASTIC FILMS

Parameters 

Durable plastic 

film 

Sample A 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score1 ........................................................................................................................ 0 .0125 

.

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0001 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0004 

Eutrophication (5%) ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0004 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0077 

Global Warming (16%) ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0013 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0016 

Indoor Air (11%) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0008 

Water Intake (3%) .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0002 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs($))2 ............................................................................................................................. 2 .32 

First Cost ................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 .32 

Future Cost (3.9%) ................................................................................................................................................................. (3) 

Functional Unit ............................................................................................................................................................................... (4) 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 4One kilogram of durable film. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

durable plastic film is $2.32 (present 

value dollars) per kilogram of durable 

plastic film. 

7. Firearm Lubricants 

Firearm lubricants are used in 

firearms to reduce the friction and wear 

between the moving parts of a firearm. 

They may also help keep the weapon 

clean and prevent the formation of 

deposits that could cause the weapon to 

jam. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in products 

and systems designed or procured for 

combat or combat-related missions and 

in spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

For biobased firearm lubricants, 

USDA identified 2 different 

manufacturers producing 2 individual 

biobased products. The 2 manufacturers 

do not necessarily include all 

manufacturers of biobased firearm 

lubricants, merely those identified 

during USDA information gathering 

activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that these 

products have been tested against 

multiple industry performance 

standards and are being used 

commercially. While other applicable 

performance standards may exist, 

applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• ASTM D130, Standard Test Method 

for Corrosiveness to Copper from 

Petroleum Products by Copper Strip 

Test; 

• ASTM D445, Standard Test Method 

for Kinematic Viscosity of Transparent 

and Opaque Liquids (and the 

Calculation of Dynamic Viscosity); 

• ASTM D5864–00, Standard Test 

Method for Determining Aerobic 

Aquatic Biodegradation of Lubricants or 

Their Components 

• ASTM D5985, Standard Test 

Method for Pour Point of Petroleum 

Products (Rotational Method); 

• ASTM D665, Standard Test Method 

for Rust-Preventing Characteristics of 

Inhibited Mineral Oil in the Presence of 

Water; and 

• ASTM D93, Standard Test Methods 

for Flash-Point by Pensky-Martens 

Closed Cup Tester. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely use, or procure 

contract services to provide, the types of 

firearms that require the use of firearm 

lubricants. Thus, they have a need for 

firearm lubricants. Designation of 

firearm lubricants will promote the use 

of biobased products, furthering the 

objectives of this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased firearm lubricants was 

performed for two of the products using 

the BEES analytical tool. Table 7 

summarizes the BEES results for the two 

firearm lubricants. As seen in Table 7, 

the environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, ranges 

from 0.0236 to 0.0501 points per gallon 

of firearm lubricant. The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to one gallon 

of firearm lubricant, expressed in 100ths 

of 1 percent. 

TABLE 7.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR FIREARM LUBRICANTS

Parameters 

Firearm lubricants 

Sample A Sample B 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ............................................................................................. 0 .0501 0 .0236 

Acidification (5%) .......................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59874 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 7.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR FIREARM LUBRICANTS—Continued 

Parameters 

Firearm lubricants 

Sample A Sample B 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0002 0 .0002 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ............................................................................................................................. 0 .0061 0 .0043 

Eutrophication (5%) ...................................................................................................................................... 0 .0110 0 .0007 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ........................................................................................................................... 0 .0154 0 .0091 

Global Warming (16%) ................................................................................................................................. 0 .0044 0 .0040 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ............................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .................................................................................................................................... 0 .0056 0 .0035 

Indoor Air (11%) ........................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) .................................................................................................................................. 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0032 0 .0010 

Water Intake (3%) ........................................................................................................................................ 0 .0042 0 .0008 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs($)) 2 ................................................................................................... 42 .13 4 .00 

First Cost ...................................................................................................................................................... 42 .13 4 .00 

Future Cost (3.9%) ....................................................................................................................................... (3) (3) 

Functional Unit ..................................................................................................................................................... One gallon of firearm lubricant. 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

firearm lubricants ranges from $4.00 to 

$42.13 (present value dollars) per gallon 

of firearm lubricant. 

8. Floor Strippers 

Floor strippers are products 

formulated to loosen waxes, resins, or 

varnishes from floor surfaces. They can 

be in either liquid or gel form, and may 

also be used with or without mechanical 

assistance. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in spacecraft 

systems and launch support equipment. 

Procuring agencies should note that, 

as discussed in section II of this 

preamble, not all biobased cleaning 

products are ‘‘environmentally 

preferable’’ to non-biobased products. 

Unless cleaning products have been 

formulated to contain no (or reduced 

levels of) metals and toxic and 

hazardous constituents, they can be 

harmful to aquatic life, the environment, 

or workers. When purchasing 

environmentally preferable cleaning 

products, Federal agencies must 

compare the ‘‘cradle-to-grave’’ impacts 

of the manufacture, use, and disposal of 

both biobased and non-biobased 

products. 

For biobased floor strippers, USDA 

identified 10 different manufacturers 

producing 12 individual biobased 

products. These 12 manufacturers do 

not necessarily include all 

manufacturers of biobased floor 

strippers, merely those identified during 

USDA information gathering activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that these 

products are typically tested against one 

or more industry performance standards 

and are being used commercially. While 

other applicable performance standards 

may exist, applicable industry 

performance standards against which 

these products have been typically 

tested, as identified by manufacturers of 

products within this item, include: 

• ASTM D6400–04, Standard 

Specification for Compostable Plastics; 

• ASTM D877–02e1, Standard Test 

Method for Dielectric Breakdown 

Voltage of Insulating Liquids Using Disk 

Electrodes; 

• Boeing Specification #D6–7127—

Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 

Transport Aircraft; 

• Federal Test Method Standard No. 

536A; 

• South Coast Air Quality 

Management District Method #313–91—

Determination of volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs) by gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry; 

• ARP 1755B—Effect of Cleaning 

Agents on Aircraft Engine Material; and 

• U.S. Navy #Navsea 6840—U.S. 

Navy surface ship (non-submarine) 

authorized chemical cleaning products 

and dispensing systems. 

• Green Seal #GS–34—Standard 

establishing environmental 

requirements for cleaning/degreasing 

agents; 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely use, or procure 

contract services that use, floor strippers 

in cleaning and maintenance activities. 

Thus, they have a need for floor 

strippers and for services that require 

the use of floor strippers. Designation of 

floor strippers will promote the use of 

biobased products, furthering the 

objectives of this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased floor strippers was 

performed for one of the products using 

the BEES analytical tool. Table 8 

summarizes the BEES results for this 

floor stripper. As seen in Table 8, the 

environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, is 0.0559 

points per treatment of 2,500 square feet 

of floor. The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to 2,500 

square feet of application, expressed in 

100ths of 1 percent. 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59875 

TABLE 8.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR FLOOR STRIPPERS

Parameters 

Floor strippers 

Sample A 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score1 ........................................................................................................................ 0 .0559 

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0005 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0272 

Eutrophication (5%) ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0028 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0103 

Global Warming (16%) ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0041 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0035 

Indoor Air (11%) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0024 

Ozone Depletion (5%) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0035 

Water Intake (3%) .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0016 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs ($)) 2 ............................................................................................................................ 8 .50 

First Cost ................................................................................................................................................................................ 8 .50 

Future Cost (3.9%) ................................................................................................................................................................. (3) 

Functional Unit ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4 2,500 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 4Square feet of application. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

floor stripper is $8.50 (present value 

dollars) per 2,500 square feet of 

application. 

9. Laundry Products 

Laundry products include laundry 

detergents, bleach, stain removers, 

fabric softeners, etc., that do not leave 

skin-irritating residues and that clean 

effectively without the use of toxic 

chemicals. These products are generally 

safe for all washable fabrics. 

Based on the information acquired, 

USDA is proposing to subcategorize this 

item into two primary types as follows: 

(1) Pretreatment and spot remover 

products and (2) general purpose 

products. USDA believes this is 

reasonable because of the varying 

concentrations of the products required 

to perform satisfactorily. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in spacecraft 

systems and launch support equipment. 

For biobased laundry products, USDA 

identified 17 different manufacturers 

producing 45 individual biobased 

products. These 17 manufacturers do 

not necessarily include all 

manufacturers of biobased laundry 

products, merely those identified during 

USDA information gathering activities. 

Information supplied by these 

manufacturers indicates that these 

products are typically tested against an 

industry performance standard and are 

being used commercially. While other 

applicable performance standards may 

exist, applicable industry performance 

standards against which these products 

have been typically tested, as identified 

by manufacturers of products within 

this item, include: 

• Boeing Specification #D6–7127—

Cleaning Interiors of Commercial 

Transport Aircraft. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely use, or procure 

contract services that use, laundry 

products in cleaning and maintenance 

activities. Thus, they have a need for 

laundry products and for services that 

require the use of laundry products. 

Designation of laundry products will 

promote the use of biobased products, 

furthering the objectives of this 

program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased laundry products was 

performed for one of the products using 

the BEES analytical tool. Table 9 

summarizes the BEES results for this 

laundry product. As seen in Table 9, the 

environmental performance score, 

which includes human health, is 0.1362 

per a quantity of laundry product 

sufficient to wash 1,000 loads of 

laundry. The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to washing 

1,000 loads of laundry, expressed in 

100ths of 1 percent. 

TABLE 9.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR LAUNDRY PRODUCTS

Parameters 

Laundry products 

Sample A 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ....................................................................................................................... 0 .1362 

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0012 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ....................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0269 

Eutrophication (5%) ................................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0032 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ..................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0609 

Global Warming (16%) ........................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0119 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59876 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 9.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR LAUNDRY PRODUCTS—Continued 

Parameters 

Laundry products 

Sample A 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ......................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) .............................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0216 

Indoor Air (11%) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) ............................................................................................................................................................ 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0043 

Water Intake (3%) .................................................................................................................................................................. 0 .0062 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs ($)) 2 ............................................................................................................................ 84 .54 

First Cost ................................................................................................................................................................................ 84 .54 

Future Cost (3.9%) ................................................................................................................................................................. (3) 

Functional Unit ............................................................................................................................................................................... (4) 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 4Amount required to wash 1,000 loads of laundry. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

laundry product was $84.54 per 1,000 

loads of laundry washed. 

10. Wood and Concrete Sealers 

Wood and concrete sealers are 

products used to protect wood and/or 

concrete from damage caused by insects, 

moisture, and decaying fungi and to 

make surfaces water resistant. 

For the reasons cited earlier in this 

notice, USDA is proposing to exempt 

this item from preferred procurement 

under the FB4P when used in spacecraft 

systems and launch support equipment. 

For biobased wood and concrete 

sealers, USDA identified 17 different 

manufacturers producing 30 individual 

biobased products. These 17 

manufacturers do not necessarily 

include all manufacturers of biobased 

wood and concrete sealers, merely those 

identified during USDA information 

gathering activities. Information 

supplied by these manufacturers 

indicates that these products are 

typically tested against multiple 

measures of performance and are being 

used commercially. While other 

relevant measurements of performance 

may exist, applicable relevant 

measurements of performance against 

which these products have been 

typically tested, as identified by 

manufacturers of products within this 

item, include: 

• ASTM D4446–05, Standard Test 

Method for Anti-Swelling Effectiveness 

of Water-Repellent Formulations and 

Differential Swelling of Untreated Wood 

When Exposed to Liquid Water 

Environments; 

• ASTM D5401–03, Standard Test 

Method for Evaluating Clear Water 

Repellent Coatings on Wood; 

• ASTM D92–05a, Standard Test 

Method for Flash and Fire Points by 

Cleveland Open Cup Tester; and 

• ASTM E84–05e1, Standard Test 

Method for Surface Burning 

Characteristics of Building Materials. 

USDA attempted to gather data on the 

potential market for biobased products 

within the Federal government as 

discussed in the section on bath and tile 

cleaners. These attempts were largely 

unsuccessful. However, Federal 

agencies routinely perform, and procure 

services that perform, the types of 

construction and paving activities that 

utilize wood and concrete sealers. Thus, 

they have a need for wood and concrete 

sealers and for services that require the 

use of wood and concrete sealers. 

Designation of wood and concrete 

sealers will promote the use of biobased 

products, furthering the objectives of 

this program. 

An analysis of the environmental and 

human health benefits and the life cycle 

costs of biobased wood and concrete 

sealers was performed for two of the 

products using the BEES analytical tool. 

Table 10 summarizes the BEES results 

for the two wood and concrete sealers. 

As seen in Table 10, the environmental 

performance score, which includes 

human health, ranges from 0.0336 to 

2.4769 points per 250 square feet of 

surface area sealed. The environmental 

performance score indicates the share of 

annual per capita U.S. environmental 

impacts that is attributable to 250 square 

feet of surface area sealed, expressed in 

100ths of 1 percent. 

TABLE 10.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR WOOD AND CONCRETE SEALERS

Parameters 

Wood and concrete sealers 

Sample A Sample B 

BEES Environmental Performance—Total Score 1 ..................................................................................... 0 .0336 2 .4769 

Acidification (5%) .................................................................................................................................. 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Criteria Air Pollutants (6%) ................................................................................................................... 0 .0003 0 .0027 

Ecological Toxicity (11%) ..................................................................................................................... 0 .0048 0 .0397 

Eutrophication (5%) .............................................................................................................................. 0 .0017 0 .3876 

Fossil Fuel Depletion (5%) ................................................................................................................... 0 .0144 0 .0559 

Global Warming (16%) ......................................................................................................................... 0 .0047 0 .0203 

Habitat Alteration (16%) ....................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Human Health (11%) ............................................................................................................................ 0 .0054 1 .9630 

Indoor Air (11%) ................................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Ozone Depletion (5%) .......................................................................................................................... 0 .0000 0 .0000 

Smog (6%) ............................................................................................................................................ 0 .0016 0 .0050 

Water Intake (3%) ................................................................................................................................ 0 .0007 0 .0027 

Economic Performance (Life Cycle Costs($)) 2 ........................................................................................... 18 .00 200 .00 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59877 

1ASTM D6866 (Standard Test Methods for 

Determining the Biobased Content of Natural Range 

Materials Using Radiocarbon and Isotope Ratio 

Mass Spectrometry Analysis) is used to distinguish 

between carbon from fossil resources (non-biobased 

carbon) and carbon from renewable sources 

(biobased carbon). The biobased content is 

expressed as the percentage of total carbon that is 

biobased carbon. 

TABLE 10.—SUMMARY OF BEES RESULTS FOR WOOD AND CONCRETE SEALERS—Continued 

Parameters 

Wood and concrete sealers 

Sample A Sample B 

First Cost .............................................................................................................................................. 18 .00 200 .00 

Future Cost (3.9%) ............................................................................................................................... (3) (3) 

Functional Unit ............................................................................................................................................. 250 square feet of surface area sealed. 

1 Numbers in parentheses indicate weighting factor. 

2 Costs are per functional unit. 

3For this item, no significant/quantifiable performance or durability differences were identified among competing alternative products. Therefore, future costs were not calculated. 

The life cycle cost of the submitted 

wood and concrete sealers range from 

$18.00 to $200.00 (present value dollars) 

per 250 square feet of surface area 

sealed. 

C. Minimum Biobased Contents 

Section 9002(e)(1)(c) directs USDA to 

recommend minimum biobased content 

levels where appropriate. In today’s 

proposed rulemaking, USDA is 

proposing minimum biobased content 

for each of the 10 items proposed for 

designation based on information 

currently available to USDA. 

As discussed in Section IV.A of this 

preamble, USDA relied entirely on 

manufacturers’ voluntary submission of 

samples to support the proposed 

designation of these 10 items. The data 

presented in the following paragraphs 

are the test results from all of the 

product samples that were submitted for 

analysis. It is the responsibility of the 

manufacturers to ‘‘self-certify’’ that each 

product being offered as a biobased 

product for preferred procurement 

contains qualifying feedstock. As 

contained in the Guidelines, the FB4P 

program will consider qualifying 

feedstocks for biobased products as 

originating from ‘‘designated countries’’

(as that term is defined in the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) § 25.003)) 

as well as from the United States. USDA 

will develop a monitoring process for 

these self-certifications to ensure 

manufacturers are using qualifying 

feedstocks. If misrepresentations are 

found, USDA will remove the subject 

biobased product from the preferred 

procurement program and may take 

further actions as deemed appropriate. 

As a result of public comments 

received on the first designated items 

rulemaking proposal, USDA decided to 

account for the slight imprecision in the 

analytical method used to determine 

biobased content of products when 

establishing the minimum biobased 

content. Thus, rather than establishing 

the minimum biobased content for an 

item at the tested biobased content of 

the product selected as the basis for the 

minimum value, USDA is establishing 

the minimum biobased content at a 

level 3 percentage points less than the 

tested value. USDA believes that this 

adjustment is appropriate to account for 

the expected variations in analytical 

results. 

USDA has determined that setting a 

minimum biobased content for 

designated items is appropriate. 

Establishing a minimum biobased 

content will encourage competition 

among manufacturers to develop 

products with higher biobased contents 

and will prevent products with de 

minimus biobased content from being 

purchased as a means of satisfying the 

requirements of section 9002. USDA 

believes that it is in the best interest of 

the preferred procurement program for 

minimum biobased contents to be set at 

levels that will realistically allow 

products to possess the necessary 

performance attributes and allow them 

to compete with non-biobased products 

in performance and economics. Setting 

the minimum biobased content for an 

item at a level met by several of the 

tested products will provide more 

products from which procurement 

officials may choose, will encourage the 

most widespread usage of biobased 

products by procuring agencies, and is 

expected to accomplish the objectives of 

section 9002. Procuring agencies are 

encouraged to seek products with the 

highest biobased content that is 

practicable in all 10 of the proposed 

designated items. 

The following paragraphs summarize 

the information that USDA used to 

propose minimum biobased contents 

within each proposed designated item. 

1. Bath and Tile Cleaners 

Eight of the 29 biobased bath and tile 

cleaners identified have been tested for 

biobased content using ASTM D6866 1

The biobased content of these 8 samples 

ranged from 16 percent to 100 percent. 

USDA evaluated the manufacturer’s 

performance claims for the product 

whose biobased content was tested at 16 

percent. The available information for 

this product did not indicate any unique 

performance characteristics or features 

not found in products with a higher 

biobased content. In addition, the tested 

biobased content of this product was 

substantially lower than the next lowest 

tested biobased content of 77 percent. 

Therefore, USDA dropped this product 

from consideration in setting the 

minimum biobased content for the item. 

The remaining 7 tested products have 

biobased contents ranging from 77 to 

100 percent. USDA is proposing to set 

the minimum biobased content for this 

item at 74 percent, based on the product 

with a tested biobased content of 77 

percent. Setting the minimum biobased 

content level based on the product with 

a tested biobased content of 77 percent 

will offer procuring agencies more 

choices in selecting products to 

purchase and will encourage the most 

widespread usage of biobased products 

by procuring agencies. To account for 

possible variability in the results of 

ASTM D6866, as discussed earlier, the 

tested 77 percent value was then 

adjusted to 74 percent. 

2. Clothing Products 

Two of the 5 available biobased 

clothing products have been tested for 

biobased content using ASTM D6866. 

The biobased content of these two 

clothing products was 99 percent and 

100 percent. 

Both of the products tested were 

composed of essentially 100 percent 

polylactic acid (PLA) fibers, which are 

a 100 percent biobased material. 

Another synthetic fiber made with 

qualifying biobased material is also 

available for clothing manufacture. 

When tested for the blankets, bedding, 

and bed linens item, the biobased 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59878 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

content of this other synthetic fiber was 

29 percent. USDA knows that clothing 

can be and is being manufactured using 

this other synthetic fiber. Based on 

percent blends typically found in 

clothing, USDA believes that it is 

reasonable that both synthetic fibers 

will be used in blends where their 

content may be around 25 percent with 

the other 75 percent being nonqualifying biobased/non-biobased 

material. 

Given the potential for the 

manufacture of biobased clothing as 

described above, USDA is proposing to 

set the minimum biobased content for 

this item at 6 percent. This is based on 

a clothing product composed of 25 

percent of the synthetic fiber with the 

lower biobased content and 75 percent 

non-qualifying biobased content or nonbiobased content. The 6 percent is 

calculated by lowering the 29 percent 

biobased content by 3 percentage points 

(to account for the variability in the 

ASTM D6866), multiply the result (i.e., 

26) by 25 percent, and then rounding 

down to the next whole integer (26 x 

0.25 = 6.5, rounded down to 6). 

USDA believes that this is a 

reasonable methodology for setting the 

minimum biobased content for biobased 

clothing and will offer procuring 

agencies more choices in selecting 

products to purchase and will 

encourage the most widespread usage of 

biobased products by procuring 

agencies. As noted earlier in this 

preamble, USDA welcomes comments 

specifically on the methodology used to 

set the proposed minimum biobased 

content for biobased clothing. 

3. Concrete and Asphalt Release Fluids 

Eight of the 37 biobased concrete and 

asphalt release fluids identified have 

been tested for biobased content using 

ASTM D6866. The biobased content of 

these 8 biobased concrete and asphalt 

release fluids ranged from 90 percent to 

98 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for this item 

at 87 percent, based on the product with 

a tested biobased content of 90 percent. 

Given that the range of tested biobased 

contents is narrow, USDA is proposing 

to set the minimum biobased content at 

the lowest tested level, which will allow 

all of the products sampled to meet the 

minimum biobased content. Setting the 

minimum biobased content level based 

on the lowest level found among the 

sampled products will offer procuring 

agencies more choices in selecting 

products to purchase and will 

encourage the most widespread usage of 

biobased products by procuring 

agencies. 

4. Cutting, Drilling, and Tapping Oils 

Twelve of the 33 biobased cutting, 

drilling, and tapping oils identified have 

been tested for biobased content using 

ASTM D6866. The biobased content of 

these 12 biobased cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils ranged from 67 percent to 

100 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for this item 

at 64 percent, based on the product with 

a tested biobased content of 67. Cutting, 

drilling, and tapping oils can be 

formulated to meet a wide range of 

demands. For example, one of the 

products with a tested biobased content 

of 67 percent is a heavy duty oil. 

Because of the resulting range in 

product characteristics, USDA is 

proposing to set the minimum biobased 

content at a level that will include all 

of the products sampled. USDA believes 

that it is in the best interest of the 

preferred procurement program for 

minimum biobased contents to be set at 

levels that will realistically allow 

products to possess the necessary 

performance attributes and allow them 

to compete with non-biobased products 

in performance and economics. 

Furthermore, setting the minimum 

biobased content level based on the 

lowest level found among the sampled 

products will offer procuring agencies 

more choices in selecting products to 

purchase and will encourage the most 

widespread usage of biobased products 

by procuring agencies. 

5. De-Icers 

Two of the 9 biobased de-icers 

identified have been tested for biobased 

content using ASTM D6866. The 

biobased content of both of these 

biobased de-icers was 100 percent. 

Therefore, USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for this item 

at 97 percent. 

6. Durable Plastic Films 

One of the 2 biobased durable plastic 

films identified have been tested for 

biobased content using ASTM D6866. 

The biobased contents of this durable 

plastic film was 64 percent. Therefore, 

USDA is proposing to set the minimum 

biobased content for this item at 61 

percent. 

7. Firearm Lubricants 

Both biobased firearm lubricants 

identified have been tested for biobased 

content using ASTM D6866. The tested 

biobased contents for these samples 

ranged were 52 percent and 95 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for firearm 

lubricants at 49 percent, based on the 

product with a tested biobased content 

of 52 percent. The firearm lubricant 

with the lower biobased content was 

specifically formulated for use in cold 

weather regions. Because of this range 

in product characteristics, USDA is 

proposing to set the minimum biobased 

content at a level that will include both 

products sampled. USDA believes that it 

is in the best interest of the preferred 

procurement program for minimum 

biobased contents to be set at levels that 

will realistically allow products to 

possess the necessary performance 

attributes and allow them to compete 

with non-biobased products in 

performance and economics. Setting the 

minimum biobased content level based 

on the lowest level found among the 

sampled products will offer procuring 

agencies more choices in selecting 

products to purchase and will 

encourage the most widespread usage of 

biobased products by procuring 

agencies. 

8. Floor Strippers 

Three of the 12 biobased floor 

strippers identified have been tested for 

biobased content using ASTM D6866. 

The biobased contents of these 3 

biobased floor strippers ranged from 82 

percent to 96 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for this item 

at 79 percent, based on the product with 

a tested biobased content of 82 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the minimum 

biobased content at a level that will 

include all of the products sampled, 

including the product with 82 percent 

biobased content. USDA believes that it 

is in the best interest of the preferred 

procurement program for minimum 

biobased contents to be set at levels that 

will realistically allow products to 

possess the necessary performance 

attributes and allow them to compete 

with non-biobased products in 

performance and economics. 

Furthermore, setting the minimum 

biobased content level based on the 

lowest level found among the sampled 

products will offer procuring agencies 

more choices in selecting products to 

purchase and will encourage the most 

widespread usage of biobased products 

by procuring agencies. 

9. Laundry Products 

Five of the 45 biobased laundry 

products identified have been tested for 

biobased content using ASTM D6866—

one pretreatment or spot remover 

biobased laundry product and 4 general 

purpose biobased laundry products. The 

biobased content of the one 

pretreatment or spot remover product 

was 11 percent. The biobased contents 

of the 4 general purpose biobased 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59879 

laundry products ranged from 37 

percent to 83 percent. 

For pretreatment or spot remover 

biobased laundry products, USDA is 

proposing to set the minimum biobased 

content at 8 percent, based on the one 

product tested. 

For general purpose biobased laundry 

products, USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content at 34 

percent, based on the product with a 

tested biobased content of 37 percent. 

Three of the 4 general purpose biobased 

laundry products had tested biobased 

contents between 37 and 40 percent. 

While USDA knows of no performance 

differences between the four general 

purpose biobased products, USDA is 

proposing to set the minimum biobased 

content at a level that will include all 

of the general purpose biobased laundry 

products sampled. Furthermore, setting 

the minimum biobased content level 

based on the lowest level found among 

these sampled products will provide 

more products from which procurement 

officials may choose and will encourage 

the most widespread usage of biobased 

products by procuring agencies. 

10. Wood and Concrete Sealers 

Five of the 17 biobased wood and 

concrete sealers identified have been 

tested for biobased content using ASTM 

D6866. The biobased content of these 5 

biobased wood and concrete sealers 

ranged from 82 percent to 91 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the 

minimum biobased content for this item 

at 79 percent, based on the products 

with a biobased content of 82 percent. 

USDA is proposing to set the minimum 

biobased content at a level that will 

include all of the products sampled. 

USDA believes that it is in the best 

interest of the preferred procurement 

program for minimum biobased 

contents to be set at levels that will 

realistically allow products to possess 

the necessary performance attributes 

and allow them to compete with nonbiobased products in performance and 

economics. Furthermore, setting the 

minimum biobased content level based 

on the lowest level found among the 

sampled products will offer procuring 

agencies more choices in selecting 

products to purchase and will 

encourage the most widespread usage of 

biobased products by procuring 

agencies. 

D. Effective Date for Procurement 

Preference and Incorporation Into 

Specifications 

USDA intends for the final rule to 

take effect thirty (30) days after 

publication of the final rule. However, 

under the terms of the proposed rule, 

procuring agencies would have a oneyear transition period, starting from the 

date of publication of the final rule, 

before the procurement preference for 

biobased products within a designated 

item would take effect. 

USDA proposes a one-year period 

before the procurement preferences 

would take effect based on an 

understanding that Federal agencies 

will need time to incorporate the 

preferences into procurement 

documents and to revise existing 

standardized specifications. Section 

9002(d) of FSRIA and section 2902(c) of 

7 CFR part 2902 explicitly acknowledge 

the latter need for Federal agencies to 

have sufficient time to revise the 

affected specifications to give preference 

to biobased products when purchasing 

the designated items. Procuring agencies 

will need time to evaluate the economic 

and technological feasibility of the 

available biobased products for their 

agency-specific uses and for compliance 

with agency-specific requirements, 

including manufacturers’ warranties for 

machinery in which the biobased 

products would be used. 

By the time these items are 

promulgated for designation, Federal 

agencies will have had a minimum of 18 

months (from when these designated 

items were proposed), and much longer 

considering when the Guidelines were 

first proposed and these requirements 

were first laid out, to implement these 

requirements. 

For these reasons, USDA proposes 

that the mandatory preference for 

biobased products under the designated 

items take effect one year after 

promulgation of the final rule. The oneyear period provides these agencies 

with ample time to evaluate the 

economic and technological feasibility 

of biobased products for a specific use 

and to revise the specifications 

accordingly. However, some agencies 

may be able to complete these processes 

more expeditiously, and not all uses 

will require extensive analysis or 

revision of existing specifications. 

Although it is allowing up to one year, 

USDA encourages procuring agencies to 

implement the procurement preferences 

as early as practicable for procurement 

actions involving any of the designated 

items. 

V. Where Can Agencies Get More 

Information on These USDA-Designated 

Items? 

Once the item designations in today’s 

proposal become final, manufacturers 

and vendors voluntarily may post 

information on specific products, 

including product and contact 

information, on the USDA biobased 

products Web site http:// 

www.biobased.oce.usda.gov. USDA will 

periodically audit the information 

displayed on the Web site and, where 

questions arise, contact the 

manufacturer or vendor to verify, 

correct, or remove incorrect or out-ofdate information. Procuring agencies 

should contact the manufacturers and 

vendors directly to discuss specific 

needs and to obtain detailed 

information on the availability and 

prices of biobased products meeting 

those needs. 

By accessing the Web site, agencies 

will also be able to obtain the 

voluntarily-posted information on each 

product concerning: Relative price; life 

cycle costs; hot links directly to a 

manufacturer’s or vendor’s Web site (if 

available); performance standards 

(industry, government, military, ASTM/ 

ISO) that the product has been tested 

against; and environmental and public 

health information from the BEES 

analysis or the alternative analysis 

embedded in the ASTM Standard 

D7075, ‘‘Standard Practice for 

Evaluating and Reporting 

Environmental Performance of Biobased 

Products.’’

USDA has linked its Web site to 

DoD’s list of specifications and 

standards, which can be used as 

guidance when procuring products. To 

access this list, go to USDA’s FB4P Web 

site and click on the ‘‘Product 

Submission’’ tab and look for the DoD 

Specifications link. 

VI. Regulatory Information 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Executive Order 12866 requires 

agencies to determine whether a 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant.’’ The 

Order defines a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as one that is likely to result in 

a rule that may: ‘‘(1) Have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more or adversely affect, in a material 

way, the economy, a sector of the 

economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or State, local, or tribal 

governments or communities; (2) Create 

a serious inconsistency or otherwise 

interfere with an action taken or 

planned by another agency; (3) 

Materially alter the budgetary impact of 

entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan 

programs or the rights and obligations of 

recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel 

legal or policy issues arising out of legal 

mandates, the President’s priorities, or 

the principles set forth in this Executive 

Order.’’


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59880 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

It has been determined that this rule 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order 

12866. The annual economic effect 

associated with today’s proposed rule 

has not been quantified because the 

information necessary to estimate the 

effect does not exist. As was discussed 

earlier in this preamble, USDA made 

extensive efforts to obtain information 

on the Federal agencies’ usage of the 10 

items proposed for designation. These 

efforts were largely unsuccessful. 

Therefore, attempts to determine the 

economic impacts of today’s proposed 

rule would necessitate estimating the 

anticipated market penetration of 

biobased products, which would entail 

many assumptions and, thus, be of 

questionable value. Also, the program 

allows procuring agencies the option of 

not purchasing biobased products if the 

costs are deemed ‘‘unreasonable.’’

Under this program, the determination 

of ‘‘unreasonable’’ costs will be made by 

individual agencies. USDA knows these 

agencies will consider such factors as 

price, life-cycle costs, and 

environmental benefits in determining 

whether the cost of a biobased product 

is determined to be ‘‘reasonable’’ or 

‘‘unreasonable.’’ However, until the 

program is actually implemented by the 

various agencies, it is impossible to 

quantify the impact this option would 

have on the economic effect of the rule. 

Therefore, USDA relied on a qualitative 

assessment to reach the judgment that 

the annual economic effect of the 

designation of these 10 items is less 

than $100 million, and likely to be 

substantially less than $100 million. 

This judgment was based primarily on 

the offsetting nature of the program (an 

increase in biobased products 

purchased with a corresponding 

decrease in petroleum products 

purchased) and, secondarily, on the 

ability of procuring agencies not to 

purchase these items if costs are judged 

unreasonable, which would reduce the 

economic effect. 

1. Summary of Impacts 

Today’s proposed rulemaking is 

expected to have both positive and 

negative impacts to individual 

businesses, including small businesses. 

USDA anticipates that the biobased 

preferred procurement program will 

provide additional opportunities for 

businesses to begin supplying biobased 

materials to manufacturers of bath and 

tile cleaners, clothing products, concrete 

and asphalt release fluids, cutting, 

drilling, and tapping oils, de-icers, 

durable plastic films, firearm lubricants, 

floor strippers, laundry products, and 

wood and concrete sealers and to begin 

supplying these products made with 

biobased materials to Federal agencies 

and their contractors. In addition, other 

businesses, including small businesses, 

that do not directly contract with 

procuring agencies may be affected 

positively by the increased demand for 

these biobased materials and products. 

However, other businesses that 

manufacture and supply only nonqualifying products and do not offer a 

biobased alternative product may 

experience a decrease in demand for 

their products. Thus, today’s proposed 

rule will likely increase the demand for 

biobased products, while decreasing the 

demand for non-qualifying products. It 

is anticipated that this will create a 

largely ‘‘offsetting’’ economic impact. 

USDA is unable to determine the 

number of businesses, including small 

businesses, that may be adversely 

affected by today’s proposed rule. If a 

business currently supplies any of the 

items proposed for designation to a 

procuring agency and those products do 

not qualify as biobased products, the 

proposed rule may reduce that 

company’s ability to compete for future 

contracts. However, the proposed rule 

will not affect existing purchase orders, 

nor will it preclude businesses from 

modifying their product lines to meet 

new specifications or solicitation 

requirements for these products 

containing biobased materials. Thus, 

many businesses, including small 

businesses, that market to Federal 

agencies and their contractors have the 

option of modifying their product lines 

to meet the new biobased specifications. 

2. Summary of Benefits 

The designation of these 10 items 

provides the benefits outlined in the 

objectives of section 9002: To increase 

domestic demand for biobased products 

and, thus, for the many agricultural 

commodities that can serve as 

feedstocks for production of biobased 

products; to spur development of the 

industrial base through value-added 

agricultural processing and 

manufacturing in rural communities; 

and to enhance the Nation’s energy 

security by substituting biobased 

products for products derived from 

imported oil and natural gas. The 

increased demand for biobased products 

will also lead to the substitution of 

products with a possibly more benign or 

beneficial environmental impact, as 

compared to the use of non-biobased 

products. By purchasing these biobased 

products, procuring agencies can 

increase opportunities for all of these 

benefits. On a national and regional 

level, today’s proposed rule can result 

in expanding and strengthening markets 

for biobased materials used in these 10 

items. However, because the extent to 

which procuring agencies will find the 

performance and costs of biobased 

products acceptable is unknown, it is 

impossible to quantify the actual 

economic effect of today’s proposed 

rule. USDA, however, anticipates the 

annual economic effect of the 

designation of these 10 items to be 

substantially below the $100 million 

threshold. In addition, today’s proposed 

rule does not: Create serious 

inconsistency or otherwise interfere 

with an action taken or planned by 

another agency; materially alter the 

budgetary impact of entitlements, 

grants, user fees, or loan programs or the 

rights and obligations of recipients 

thereof; or raise novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in Executive Order 12866. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601–602, generally 

requires an agency to prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule 

subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

USDA evaluated the potential impacts 

of its proposed designation of these 10 

items to determine whether its actions 

would have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Because the Federal Biobased Products 

Preferred Procurement Program in 

section 9002 of FSRIA applies only to 

Federal agencies and their contractors, 

small governmental (city, county, etc.) 

agencies are not affected. Thus, the 

proposal, if promulgated, will not have 

a significant economic impact on small 

governmental jurisdictions. USDA 

anticipates that this program will affect 

entities, both large and small, that 

manufacture or sell biobased products. 

For example, the designation of items 

for preferred procurement will provide 

additional opportunities for businesses 

to manufacture and sell biobased 

products to Federal agencies and their 

contractors. Similar opportunities will 

be provided for entities that supply 

biobased materials to manufacturers. 

Conversely, the biobased procurement 

program may decrease opportunities for 

businesses that manufacture or sell nonbiobased products or provide 

components for the manufacturing of 

such products. However, the proposed 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59881 

rule will not affect existing purchase 

orders and it will not preclude 

procuring agencies from continuing to 

purchase non-biobased items under 

certain conditions relating to the 

availability, performance, or cost of 

biobased items. Today’s proposed rule 

will also not preclude businesses from 

modifying their product lines to meet 

new specifications or solicitation 

requirements for these products 

containing biobased materials. Thus, the 

economic impacts of today’s proposed 

rule are not expected to be significant. 

The intent of section 9002 is largely 

to stimulate the production of new 

biobased products and to energize 

emerging markets for those products. 

Because the program is still in its 

infancy, however, it is unknown how 

many businesses will ultimately be 

affected. While USDA has no data on 

the number of small businesses that may 

choose to develop and market products 

within the 10 items proposed for 

designation by today’s proposed 

rulemaking, the number is expected to 

be small. Because biobased products 

represent an emerging market, only a 

small percentage of all manufacturers, 

large or small, are expected to develop 

and market biobased products. Thus, 

the number of small businesses affected 

by today’s proposed rulemaking is not 

expected to be substantial. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s proposed rule on 

small entities, USDA certifies that this 

action will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This rule, 

therefore, does not require a regulatory 

flexibility analysis. 

While not a factor relevant to 

determining whether the proposed rule 

will have a significant impact for RFA 

purposes, USDA has concluded that the 

effect of today’s proposed rule would be 

to provide positive opportunities to 

businesses engaged in the manufacture 

of these biobased products. Purchase 

and use of these biobased products by 

procuring agencies increase demand for 

these products and result in private 

sector development of new 

technologies, creating business and 

employment opportunities that enhance 

local, regional, and national economies. 

Technological innovation associated 

with the use of biobased materials can 

translate into economic growth and 

increased industry competitiveness 

worldwide, thereby, creating 

opportunities for small entities. 

C. Executive Order 12630: 

Governmental Actions and Interference 

With Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with Executive Order 

12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights, and does not 

contain policies that would have 

implications for these rights. 

D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice 

Reform 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

in accordance with Executive Order 

12988, Civil Justice Reform. This 

proposed rule does not preempt State or 

local laws, is not intended to have 

retroactive effect, and does not involve 

administrative appeals. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposed rule does not have 

sufficient federalism implications to 

warrant the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. Provisions of this proposed 

rule will not have a substantial direct 

effect on States or their political 

subdivisions or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various government levels. 

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This proposed rule contains no 

Federal mandates under the regulatory 

provisions of Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 

2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, for State, local, and 

tribal governments, or the private sector. 

Therefore, a statement under section 

202 of UMRA is not required. 

G. Executive Order 12372: 

Intergovernmental Review of Federal 

Programs 

For the reasons set forth in the Final 

Rule Related Notice for 7 CFR part 3015, 

subpart V (48 FR 29115, June 24, 1983), 

this program is excluded from the scope 

of the Executive Order 12372, which 

requires intergovernmental consultation 

with State and local officials. This 

program does not directly affect State 

and local governments. 

H. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Today’s proposed rule does not 

significantly or uniquely affect ‘‘one or 

more Indian tribes, * * * the 

relationship between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, or * * * 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes.’’ Thus, 

no further action is required under 

Executive Order 13175. 

I. Paperwork Reduction Act 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

through 3520), the information 

collection under this proposed rule is 

currently approved under OMB control 

number 0503–0011. 

J. E-Government Act Compliance 

The Office of Energy Policy and New 

Uses is committed to compliance with 

the E-Government Act, to promote the 

use of the Internet and other 

information technologies to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. USDA 

is implementing an electronic 

information system for posting 

information voluntarily submitted by 

manufacturers or vendors on the 

products they intend to offer for 

preferred procurement under each item 

designated. For information pertinent to 

GPEA compliance related to this rule, 

please contact Marvin Duncan at (202) 

401–0461. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 2902 

Biobased products, Procurement. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Department of Agriculture 

proposes to amend 7 CFR chapter XXIX 

as follows: 

CHAPTER XXIX—OFFICE OF ENERGY 

POLICY AND NEW USES, DEPARTMENT OF 

AGRICULTURE 

PART 2902—GUIDELINES FOR 

DESIGNATING BIOBASED PRODUCTS 

FOR FEDERAL PROCUREMENT 

1. The authority citation for part 2902 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 8102. 

2. Add §§ 2902.36 through 2902.45 to 

subpart B to read as follows: 

§ 2902.36 Bath and tile cleaners. 

(a) Definition. Bath and tile cleaners 

are products designed to clean deposits 

on bath tubs, shower doors, shower 

curtains, bathroom tiles, floors, doors, 

counter tops, etc. They are available 

both in concentrated and ready-to-use 

forms. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 74 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
59882 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased bath and tile 

cleaners. By that date, Federal agencies 

that have the responsibility for drafting 

or reviewing specifications for items to 

be procured shall ensure that the 

relevant specifications require the use of 

biobased bath and tile cleaners. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

§ 2902.37 Clothing products. 

(a) Definition. Clothing products are 

coverings designed to be worn on a 

person’s body. These products include 

coverings for the torso and limbs, as 

well as coverings for the hands, feet, 

and head. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 6 percent 

and shall be based on the amount of 

qualifying biobased carbon in the 

product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased clothing products. 

By that date, Federal agencies that have 

the responsibility for drafting or 

reviewing specifications for items to be 

procured shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased clothing products. 

(d) Exemptions. The following 

applications are exempt for the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item: 

(1) Military equipment: Product or 

system designed or procured for combat 

or combat-related missions. 

(2) Spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

§ 2902.38 Concrete and asphalt release 

fluids. 

(a) Definition. Concrete and asphalt 

release fluids are products designed to 

provide a lubricating barrier between 

the composite surface materials (e.g., 

concrete or asphalt) and the container 

(e.g., wood or metal forms, truck beds, 

roller surfaces, etc.). 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 87 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased concrete and 

asphalt release fluids. By that date, 

Federal agencies that have the 

responsibility for drafting or reviewing 

specifications for items to be procured 

shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased concrete and asphalt release 

fluids. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

§ 2902.39 Cutting, drilling, and tapping 

oils. 

(a) Definition. Cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils are products designed to 

provide lubrication and reduce wear on 

the contact parts for cutting, drilling, 

and tapping machinery. This item 

applies only to neat oils. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 64 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased cutting, drilling, 

and tapping oils. By that date, Federal 

agencies that have the responsibility for 

drafting or reviewing specifications for 

items to be procured shall ensure that 

the relevant specifications require the 

use of biobased cutting, drilling, and 

tapping oils. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment are 

exempt for the preferred procurement 

requirement for this item. 

§ 2902.40 De-icers. 

(a) Definition. De-icers are agents that 

aid in the removal of snow and ice. For 

the purposes of this rule, de-icers do not 

include materials used to de-ice aircraft 

and airport runways. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 97 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased de-icers. By that 

date, Federal agencies that have the 

responsibility for drafting or reviewing 

specifications for items to be procured 

shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased de-icers. 

(d) Exemptions. The following 

applications are exempt for the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item: 

(1) Military equipment: Product or 

system designed or procured for combat 

or combat-related missions. 

(2) Spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

§ 2902.41 Durable plastic films. 

(a) Definition. Durable plastic films 

are products typically used in the 

production of bags and packaging 

materials, and designed to resist water, 

ammonia, and other compounds, and to 

not readily biodegrade. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 61 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased durable plastic 

films. By that date, Federal agencies that 

have the responsibility for drafting or 

reviewing specifications for items to be 

procured shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased durable plastic films. 

(d) Determining overlap with an EPAdesignated recovered content product. 

Qualifying products within this item 

may overlap with the EPA-designated 

recovered content product: Nonpaper 

Office Products: Plastic trash bags. 

USDA is requesting that manufacturers 

of these qualifying biobased products 

provide information on the USDA Web 

site of qualifying biobased products 

about the intended uses of the product, 

information on whether or not the 

product contains any recovered 

material, in addition to biobased 

ingredients, and performance standards 

against which the product has been 

tested. This information will assist 

Federal agencies in determining 

whether or not a qualifying biobased 

product overlaps with EPA-designated 

nonpaper office products (plastic trash 

bags) and which product should be 

afforded the preference in purchasing. 

(e) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 11, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59883 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

§ 2902.42 Firearm lubricants. 

(a) Definition. Firearm lubricants are 

used in firearms to reduce the friction 

and wear between the moving parts of 

a firearm, and to keep the weapon clean 

and prevent the formation of deposits 

that could cause the weapon to jam. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 49 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased firearm lubricants. 

By that date, Federal agencies that have 

the responsibility for drafting or 

reviewing specifications for items to be 

procured shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased firearm lubricants. 

(d) Exemptions. The following 

applications are exempt for the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item: 

(1) Military equipment: Product or 

system designed or procured for combat 

or combat-related missions. 

(2) Spacecraft systems and launch 

support equipment. 

§ 2902.43 Floor Strippers. 

(a) Definition. Floor strippers are 

products formulated to loosen waxes, 

resins, or varnishes from floor surfaces. 

They can be in either liquid or gel form, 

and may also be used with or without 

mechanical assistance. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 79 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased floor strippers. By 

that date, Federal agencies that have the 

responsibility for drafting or reviewing 

specifications for items to be procured 

shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased floor strippers. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

§ 2902.44 Laundry products. 

(a) Definition. (1) Laundry products 

include laundry detergents, bleach, 

stain removers, fabric softeners, etc., 

that do not leave skin-irritating residues 

and that clean effectively without the 

use of toxic chemicals. 

(2) The two types of laundry products 

for which minimum biobased contents 

under paragraph (b) of this section 

apply are: 

(i) Pretreatment or spot removers. 

Laundry products specifically used to 

pretreat laundry to remove spots and 

stains. 

(ii) General purpose laundry 

products. Laundry products used for 

regular cleaning activities. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content shall be 

based on the amount of qualifying 

biobased carbon in the product as a 

percent of the weight (mass) of the total 

organic carbon in the finished product. 

The applicable minimum biobased 

contents are: 

(1) Pretreatment and spot removers—

8 percent. 

(2) General purpose laundry 

products—34 percent. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased laundry products. 

By that date, Federal agencies that have 

the responsibility for drafting or 

reviewing specifications for items to be 

procured shall ensure that the relevant 

specifications require the use of 

biobased laundry products. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

§ 2902.45 Wood and concrete sealers. 

(a) Definition. Wood and concrete 

sealers are products used to protect 

wood and/or concrete from damage 

caused by insects, moisture, and 

decaying fungi and to make surfaces 

water resistant. 

(b) Minimum biobased content. The 

minimum biobased content is 79 

percent and shall be based on the 

amount of qualifying biobased carbon in 

the product as a percent of the weight 

(mass) of the total organic carbon in the 

finished product. 

(c) Preference effective date. No later 

than [date one year after the date of 

publication of the final rule], procuring 

agencies, in accordance with this part, 

will give a procurement preference for 

qualifying biobased wood and concrete 

sealers. By that date, Federal agencies 

that have the responsibility for drafting 

or reviewing specifications for items to 

be procured shall ensure that the 

relevant specifications require the use of 

biobased wood and concrete sealers. 

(d) Exemptions. Spacecraft systems 

and launch support equipment 

applications are exempt from the 

preferred procurement requirement for 

this item. 

Dated: September 26, 2006. 

Roger Conway, 

Director, Office of Energy Policy and New 

Uses , U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

[FR Doc. 06–8368 Filed 10–10–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–GL–P 


pwalker on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS2